Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-27-2012, 12:38 PM   #31
Pentaxian
hnikesch's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Michigan, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,254
SMC-M 135 f3.5

My favorite lens on the Q easy to handle for a long lens about 750mm FOV. Same shot as the 200 above. Shot the 135 at each stop from f3.5 to f11 and it was best at f5.6. Added a little contrast and sharpened

Hans

Edit: After shooting out doors and not through glass I found almost no PF and better sharpness when shooting at f6.3

All shots with Photodiox adapter painted flat black inside

Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX Q  Photo 

Last edited by hnikesch; 01-24-2013 at 11:02 AM.
12-27-2012, 01:20 PM   #32
Pentaxian
hnikesch's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Michigan, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,254
Tamron LD Di 70-300 AF zoom @300

Because I got the Q for Tele shots I tested the Tamron @300mm 7 shots from f5.6 to f16 and the best results were at f8 ~ f6.3 & f10 only slightly less sharp. Reduced and added slight bit of contrast and sharpened. I found very little difference between the DAL 55-300 and the Tamron 70-300 with both stopped down about 2 stops


Hans

Edit: After some additional shooting out doors and not through glass I found the DAL 55-300 noticeably better than the Tamron

All shots with Photodiox adapter painted flat black inside
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX Q  Photo 

Last edited by hnikesch; 01-24-2013 at 11:02 AM.
12-27-2012, 01:29 PM   #33
Pentaxian
hnikesch's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Michigan, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,254
DAL 55-300mm Zoom @ 300

I shot the DAL from F5.8 through f11 and found the sharpness about common from f5.8 thru. f7.1 then things got less sharp. The best shot with the least PF was at f7.1 So with the DAL I have some latitude with apertures and still get a good image but the sweet spot seems to be about f7.1 or 2 clicks on the fotodiox adapter. Reduced and sharpened. I found very little difference between the DAL 55-300 and the Tamron 70-300 with both stopped down about 2 stops

Hans

After some additional shooting out doors and not through glass I found the DAL 55-300 noticeably better than the Tamron

All shots with Photodiox adapter painted flat black inside
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX Q  Photo 

Last edited by hnikesch; 01-24-2013 at 11:02 AM.
12-27-2012, 05:17 PM   #34
Veteran Member
crewl1's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,797
Original Poster
Thanks Hans, added your reviews to the index.

12-27-2012, 09:18 PM   #35
Veteran Member
VisualDarkness's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,441
QuoteOriginally posted by hnikesch Quote
Because I got the Q for Tele shots I tested the Tamron @300mm 7 shots from f5.6 to f16 and the best results were at f8 ~ f6.3 & f10 only slightly less sharp. Reduced and added slight bit of contrast and sharpened. I found very little difference between the DAL 55-300 and the Tamron 70-300 with both stopped down about 2 stops


Hans
Am I the only one seeing tilt shift effect in this pic? As if the lens isn't vertically aligned.
12-27-2012, 09:43 PM   #36
Pentaxian
Sagitta's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Maine
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,937
QuoteOriginally posted by VisualDarkness Quote
Am I the only one seeing tilt shift effect in this pic? As if the lens isn't vertically aligned.
I'm seeing it as well. It has a definite zone where it blurs out at both top and bottom.

EDIT: I'm awaiting taxes to grab a Q10, once I do I'll be testing it on my El Cheapo set of stuff. Hopefully at least a few of the lenses behave themselves. I'm particularly interested in seeing how my Sears 135 macro (the 'glow' lens) behaves with the Q.
12-28-2012, 04:51 AM   #37
Veteran Member
VisualDarkness's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,441
I'm still waiting for my Q-PK Kiwi adapter and one lens I'm really interested in testing is my Sigma 20/1.8. It's not long enough to be a birding lens, more for portraiture. It is apparently decently sharp in the center and got good close focus focus ability.

By the way, what does the colour of the links mean?
12-28-2012, 08:18 AM   #38
Veteran Member
crewl1's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,797
Original Poster
The different colors occurred because I copied the first set of links from Baro-nite.
When I get a chance I will re do to see if that fixes the colors.

12-28-2012, 08:25 AM   #39
Pentaxian
hnikesch's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Michigan, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,254
QuoteOriginally posted by VisualDarkness Quote
Am I the only one seeing tilt shift effect in this pic? As if the lens isn't vertically aligned.
Sorry for using that image, It is caused by the electronic shutter, The image was hand held @ 1/200 sec. with a 3rd party adapter without a shutter. Slight camera movement during the exposure can cause the jello effect that many here have talked about. It's not the lens, it was Me, way to slow of a shutter speed for 1650mm with electronic shutter. I wanted ISO 125 and should have used a tripod.

Hans

Last edited by hnikesch; 12-28-2012 at 08:34 AM.
12-28-2012, 08:33 AM   #40
Pentaxian
hnikesch's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Michigan, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,254
QuoteOriginally posted by Sagitta Quote
I'm seeing it as well. It has a definite zone where it blurs out at both top and bottom.

EDIT: I'm awaiting taxes to grab a Q10, once I do I'll be testing it on my El Cheapo set of stuff. Hopefully at least a few of the lenses behave themselves. I'm particularly interested in seeing how my Sears 135 macro (the 'glow' lens) behaves with the Q.
I have two copies of the Sears 135 f2.8 macro lens and have used it on the Q. One copy noticeably better than the other. The lens works well but must be stopped down to about f5.6 to get the best out of the lens. At that point it's almost as good as my SMC-M 135 f3.5. I am going to try it for macro stuff and will post the results later. I was not pleased with the results at f2.8.

Hans

Update: I did a few shots to look at the Sears 135 f2.8 Macro vs the SMC-M 135 f3.5 hand held close ups. The upper is the Sears, lower the SMC The SMC is quite a bit better both close up and Tele work. Both at f5.6 hand held 1/100 sec. ISO 1250 added a little contrast and sharpened. I had hoped to use the f2.8 but...
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX Q  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX Q  Photo 

Last edited by hnikesch; 12-28-2012 at 02:35 PM.
12-28-2012, 11:26 AM   #41
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chicago suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 1,535
QuoteOriginally posted by hnikesch Quote
I have two copies of the Sears 135 f2.8 macro lens and have used it on the Q. One copy noticeably better than the other. The lens works well but must be stopped down to about f5.6 to get the best out of the lens. At that point it's almost as good as my SMC-M 135 f3.5. I am going to try it for macro stuff and will post the results later. I was not pleased with the results at f2.8.
I have a JC Penney 135 f2.8 that got a brief try on the Q, then got re-relegated back to the "got it really cheap, but not really worth it" drawer. My M42 Super Tak 135 f3.5 is a much better lens, and much more size appropriate for the Q.

Scott
12-28-2012, 11:52 AM   #42
Pentaxian
hnikesch's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Michigan, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,254
QuoteOriginally posted by snostorm Quote
I have a JC Penney 135 f2.8 that got a brief try on the Q, then got re-relegated back to the "got it really cheap, but not really worth it" drawer. My M42 Super Tak 135 f3.5 is a much better lens, and much more size appropriate for the Q.

Scott
I think my Sears is in the same category "not really worth it", it's much larger than the SMC-M 135 f3.5 and not as good.

Hans

Last edited by hnikesch; 12-28-2012 at 02:34 PM.
12-29-2012, 10:56 AM   #43
Pentaxian
hnikesch's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Michigan, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,254
4mm C mount Clover LENS043

After ordering 4 C mount lenses and getting 3 CS mounts (Returned) I finally got one it's a 4mm cctv c mount. I was hoping for something a little wider but this one works. Got it through Amazon from Advance Security Products $19.45 incl shipping. It really looks nice on the Q and the DOF is vast. It focuses easily using peaking and 4X. I am still holding out for a 2.5mm. Several images of the back yard ISO 125 @1/500 sec. it is a fixed aperture at about f2, I like it it will be fun to play with walking around and street shots. Images straight out of the camera no PP or sharpening.

Hans
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX Q  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX Q  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
Canon PowerShot S100  Photo 

Last edited by hnikesch; 02-08-2013 at 03:56 PM.
01-04-2013, 01:46 PM - 2 Likes   #44
Veteran Member
crewl1's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,797
Original Poster
Sigma 50-500mm OS HSM

I wanted to wait a bit to do the review on the Bigma with the Q since I just received it over Christmas, but I took it out today and learned quite a bit about it's tendencies so I am ready to post.

(This is not a review of the lens in it's intended application as I have found the lens to perform better on my K-5 than any Sigma 500mm zoom I have previously tested.)

Wide open the Bigma natively is a little soft and sharpens up at f8-f11, but that puts it into the diffraction zone on the Q.
Nevertheless it can produce decent results if you stop it down one stop on the adapter, where at the long end the lens is running at f8.

For some reason the short 50mm ( 275mm eq) end of the zoom is not very good on the Q, it produces fuzzy results no matter the aperture - you can do better with a native 300mm zoom such as the DA55-300 or even a Tamron 70-300.
Once you zoom in past 100mm, the Bigma produces decent images all the way up to 500mm to give a whopping 2750mm equivalent.

The output is not as sharp when compared to the 'gold standard on the Q' DA*300 but pictures are reasonably detailed and can be cleaned up in post fairly well.
If you need the reach, the Bigma +Q can deliver as long as you have good light and a solid mount.

The samples below were shot at 500mm, ISO 125, 1/500 sec with the Pentax adapter set at position 1 for approx f8 aperture.




Overview shot for distance perspective. Hawk was at the top circle, heron at the bottom circle.
01-04-2013, 02:29 PM   #45
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chicago suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 1,535
Hi Larry,

Nice!

The perspective shots are really needed to understand what the advantages are with super tele and the Q.

I'm almost starting to regret passing on a MF Sigma EX 500 f4.5 APO that Kerrick James offered quite a while back on the MP here. It wasn't right for what I do with my DSLRs, but it probably would rock with the Q. . .

Scott
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
200mm, 50mm, adapter, auto, camera, f1.8, f2.8, flickr, focus, hawk, infinity, lens, macro, mirrorless, pentax, pentax q, pentax q10, pentax q7, q-s1, q10, q7, shot, shots, smc
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Has anyone tried Canon lenses on the Q/Q10? NeilGratton Pentax Q 14 05-31-2013 09:03 AM
Ideas on diffusing the onboard flash of the Q? Tonto Pentax Q 28 05-19-2013 11:46 AM
Pentax Q lenses tested by Photozone Mistral75 Pentax Q 9 11-16-2011 12:11 PM
Dumb Question: Adapted Leica lenses on film bodies? Why not??? DanielT74 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 10 10-26-2011 12:05 AM
Could Pentax sell you on the Q if they had better lenses? devorama Pentax Compact Cameras 17 06-29-2011 09:34 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:03 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top